Perpetual Motion is Impossible

[jim_mich]

So, we have another word-twister here...

All will be revealed in time, by the end of the year, you said.

Stop twisting my words. I NEVER said all would be revealed by the end of the year. That is a twisted lie. I said I hope to have my wheel finish by the end of the year, God willing.

Assuming the wheel works, (I have no doubt) then all CAN NOT be revealed until patents are filed, etc. Thus "All will be revealed" is not the end of the year.

So now, stop being a word-twister. Stop claiming that its a law that PM is impossible. Stop claiming that simply because a physical wheel is not yet finish, that you know that it's impossible for it to work. You are not all knowing.

I need to find a source for crow meat so all of you will have a good supply.

[jim_mich]

Found some crow recipes for you guys...
Crow meat
Three Crow Recipes
Crow Stew
Fried Crow
Eat Crow

Still seeking a source of crow meat for you guys. I might need to have my neighbor shoot some crows. He sells frozen butchered chickens, so he has the experience and I'm sure he could butcher a few crows. Do crows fly south for the winter? I've not seen any since the weather turned cold.

[Furcurequs]

Here are some chickens for you to count, jim_mich:

https://www.google.com/search?q=chicken+eggs&tbm=isch

...but if you are more into counting crows (and not the band):

https://www.google.com/search?q=crow+eggs&tbm=isch

[jim_mich]

Sorry, you guys will need to wait until Michigan crow hunting season opens again (months of February, March, August, and September) Link

[eccentrically1]

So, we have another word-twister here...

All will be revealed in time, by the end of the year, you said.

Stop twisting my words. I NEVER said all would be revealed by the end of the year. That is a twisted lie. I said I hope to have my wheel finish by the end of the year, God willing.

Assuming the wheel works, (I have no doubt) then all CAN NOT be revealed until patents are filed, etc. Thus "All will be revealed" is not the end of the year.

So now, stop being a word-twister. Stop claiming that its a law that PM is impossible. Stop claiming that simply because a physical wheel is not yet finish, that you know that it's impossible for it to work. You are not all knowing.

I trust you, you don't need a patent. Just say it works, your word is good with me. No word twisting here; if it works, or not, just say so.
10 more days!

The law says what it says, I don't twist its words. By the thermodynamic laws, Pm is impossible, it's not hard to understand. A loophole is not there to be found in thermodynamics that you are basing your hypothesis on.

Will the 8 bangs per rotation be equally spaced apart in time?

[jim_mich]

I agree that according to thermodynamics, PM is indeed impossible by thermodynamic means.

I agree there is no perpetual motion loophole in thermodynamics.

I've said this before, thermodynamic laws don't apply to a motion wheel. There is no conversion of thermal heat into work or motion. A motion-wheel is not a heat engine.

Thermodynamics has been used as an excuse for claiming that conservation of energy is a law. But conservation of energy is only a thermodynamic law. It has been expanded in an attempt to be all inclusive. It is not all inclusive. It seems like a logical law. And as far as heat conversion it holds true. But when one gets into kinetic energy and motion, the thermodynamic laws don't hold up.

I've tried to explain this in the past, but it goes whoosh right over your heads.

[ME]

I've tried to explain this in the past, but it goes whoosh right over your heads.

Perhaps you could re-transmit that explanation? There was a lot of noise and interference when I tuned in.

[pequaide]

I got out the cart wheel to use it as a 40 to one, or greater, wheel mass to missile mass ratio. I fastened a 1.4 inch super ball on one end of a string and put a loop in the other end of the string. The string was long enough to wrap a little more than one circumference around the rim mass cart wheel.

The looped end of the string was placed over a pin I have on the circumference of the rim mass cart wheel. I spun the wheel as slowly as a functional throw can be made and released the ball at about 2 o'clock. I would guess that the arch velocity was about .5 meter per second or less.

The super ball made a whirring sound as it unwrapped from the wheel and violently struck the carpeted floor. It bounced up and violently hit the ceiling. It ricocheted off of the ceiling and back down to the floor; caromed off of the floor and into various objects in the lab. It did not appear that more than about half of the wheel's rotation was used to throw the super ball.

Which of the two statements below is most similar to what happened in paragraph three?

The ball can not rise more than four or five feet and therefore can not hit the ceiling.

The ball will come off of the wheel moving 40 times as fast as the wheel; and is therefore capable of rising about 60 feet.

If you picked 60 feet you agree with Isaac Newton; If you picked 4 feet you agree with; those that think energy can not be made.

[jim_mich]

Retransmission:
See post #139011, page two of this current thread.

OK, let's see if I can explain.

Heat-type energy NEVER transfers spontaneously from cold objects to warm objects. So thermodynamic processes are ALWAYS merging toward a common temperature. If you had a process whereby heat flowed spontaneously out from a colder material and into a warmer material (in other words, a Maxwell's Demon) then you would have the makings of perpetual motion by way of a heat engine.

A Maxwell's Demon does not increase the energy of the system. It simply increases the usability of the existing heat of the system. In the process it sucks kinetic heat energy from the environment and gives it back in the form of a heat difference which can be harnessed by a heat engine.

Motions of objects are also kinetic energy. There is no physics law to limit motion from transferring spontaneously from one weight to another weight based upon the motion speeds of the weights. A weight can mechanically transfer its motion to a slower moving weight or to a faster moving weight. All it takes is proper leveraging.

When one weight gives up most of its momentum to a second weight, (while conserving total system momentum) then the KE of the two weights along with the wheel are NOT conserved. The kinetic energy can in certain circumstances be increased. There is no law of conservation of kinetic energy. Newton's laws of motion rule.

Then, like with Maxwell's Demon, the increased kinetic energy of the system (the increased ectropy) is used to produce motion.

[eccentrically1]

Newton's laws of motion rule? Then why don't physicists use them to explain why PM is impossible? Could it be because thermodynamic laws have been discovered to be more fundamental and cover more types of systems , heat engines as well as motion engines? Do Newton's laws rule over relativity too?

There aren't any loopholes in the laws of motion. You're using energy and momentum, thermodynamic terms, to try to find one in those laws. The laws are tricky like that. They are inextricably intertwined. And they have formulas that have described everything from the very small to galactic sized and are relied on for everything from the simplest machine to space rockets.

Maybe we should call them the thermokinetic laws. Thermodynamic doesn't seem to cut it here.

[jim_mich]

eccentrically1, I'll order some crow for you also.

[ME]

When one weight gives up most of its momentum to a second weight...

That's what I don't understand...

The system begins with an unchanging momentum (same mass, same velocity, same momentum, same Kinetic energy: Ek(1;t0)=Ek(2;t0)=0.5*m*v^2).
Why would mass(m1) give up its momentum(0.5*m*v1)?
Answer: you have a mechanism providing an event.
After this event the Kinetic energies are: Ek(1;t1)=(m*v^2)*1/8, Ek(2;t1)=(m*v^2)*9/8 (calculated in relation to initial velocity)
You are correct that Ek1+Ek2=(m*v^2)*10/8, a gain of 2/8 (25%)... but I'm not sure in what reference frame, because as the masses had 0 velocity in relation to their center of mass, now after that event both masses have a relative velocity sway from the center of mass. (I would have to draw it up)
And that's weird.

(the following could be nonsense:)
A current boiling naive thought is leaning towards a signing problem in Ek(1;t1) --> meaning negative energy
as dE=0.5*dP*dV or Required.Energy=Change.of.momentum by Change.of.velocity
then dE=0.5* m*(v-0.5*v) * (-0.5*v) = (m*v^2)*(-1/8)
The resulting Ek1+Ek2 would be (-1/8)mv2+(9/8)mv2 = 1*m*v^2; or: no gain.

I guess you are not going to reveal what's happening at that event?

[jim_mich]

Think back to how Bessler said the weights moved. Do they both move outward?

[Fcdriver]

Newton's laws of motion rule? Then why don't physicists use them to explain why PM is impossible? Could it be because thermodynamic laws have been discovered to be more fundamental and cover more types of systems , heat engines as well as motion engines? Do Newton's laws rule over relativity too?

There aren't any loopholes in the laws of motion. You're using energy and momentum, thermodynamic terms, to try to find one in those laws. The laws are tricky like that. They are inextricably intertwined. And they have formulas that have described everything from the very small to galactic sized and are relied on for everything from the simplest machine to space rockets.

Maybe we should call them the thermokinetic laws. Thermodynamic doesn't seem to cut it here.

The second law of motion, f=ma, turning a wheel that lifts at a 20 to1 mechanical advantage, but over a degree turn of the wheel greatly divides the weight per turn of the wheel. A falling weight equal to the turning of the wheel, would lift 20 to be balanced.

[ME]

For that it's important how those weights move;
(at least for my understanding: I need to be able to picture it)

As one goes closer to the rim it should gain angular acceleration...
This could be beneficial. But because of inertia of the weight it will resist that action because of that acceleration so I would say that will cost some.

As the other goes towards the rim it should (because of inertia) do this almost effortless (that could be beneficial). Because of a larger radius there's a slowing in angular momentum; most probably braking the wheel.

I simply don't know where to begin...
You seem to have a more positive view.